Campbell

We have been testing the unit in our shop for the past couple weeks. The unit has excellent color accuracy and WDR. Like its predecessor the unit is extremely easy to install and setup. The onboard software is feature rich supporting 4 independent video streams, edge recording and much more. Being a Supreme series camera it uses a new faster CPU that will support the SVC codec in the future. For the price I don't think you can find a better camera with the features the Vivotek IP8362 has. Thanks, I have really had some good luck with Vivoteks. They are easy to setup...I wish they would develop some higher MP cameras though, like a 5MP They have the 3MP FD8171V Fisheye!

15-20m shouldn't give you any issues even with "El-cheapo" HDMI cables. If you want to push beyond that, you'll need to start investing in the higher quality stuff. That's about 50ft if you're American

Criminals ... unless you were being funny then... HAHA

My reading of this was that he was referring to the IP's of the cameras and not that of his router, in which case you need to set your cameras to a static IP rather than DHCP.

I don't think that Cat5 is unproven as a viable alternative to coax.

PoE has been standardised. A PoE injector is usually a single port PoE power supply. A PoE switch is a switch which has PoE capabilities in its ports. A PoE adaptor is a splitter and outputs power back into its own wire again. So to power your VS, a PoE switch or a PoE injector will do the trick. You won't be able to finangle the adaptor to do it though. And judging by the tech specs and data sheet, you should be able to power the camera direct from the VS's PoE output so no it doesn't to answer the question.

Can you plz post sample pix from your CNB cams Thx I would strongly recommend this link http://lmgtfy.com/?q=basic+electricity+101 Wrong thread?

Holy thread necro Batman!

Camera phones aren't surveillance, wal mart is private property and used mainly for asset protection (most are dummy cameras anyways in my experience). Two completely different beasts... cameras in public paid for by you and me with the sole intent of finding us breaking some random law nobody even knew existed or tracking us in order for the gov't to make a buck is a problem. I'm fine with cameras on cop cars too because again, it's for asset protection (mainly preventing costly lawsuits). When the gov't starts spending money with the specific intent to invade my privacy but claim it's for public safety... then I have a problem. What privacy is being invaded? You're in public... you have no privacy. Why do people think they have rights to not be observed in public. And despite your protestations, the government does not have an army of bureaucrats watching cameras all day long to find any sort of miniature trespass. It has better things to do than allocate funding to some old biddy watching for people who litter.

Makita LXT's. Wont use anything else.

@Fa Chris. I find the... "this is the beginning of a very slippery slope" argument illogical. It's a classic "What if" scenario. It's akin to saying... we shouldn't allow mining because Company X will make steel out of it, and that steel will be used in the manufacturing of an atomic bomb, and then they could nuke the world. Yeah it's an extreme example but the principle still holds. CCTV in public does not automatically lead to wire tapping and you're not going to have MI5 or the NSA or CIA or what ever sitting there listening to everything you do or following you around covertly. You aren't significant, you aren't being investigated. Stop being paranoid! You don't have any reason to be and you aren't sacrificing any freedoms! If it was say... Google doing it so they could target you with advertising then yeah, I agree but it's not, it's the sodding government and that's an inefficient bureaucratic nightmare which couldn't tie its own shoelace!

What freedom have I given up by allowing CCTV in a public place?

NUUO has a CMS system

Upgrade is free.

Upgrade to 8.4 or do a database repair.

http://www.vivotek.com/downloads/downloads.php?kind=videoclips The videos are here. **EDIT** I fail at BB code.

I found the best answer was to stop using Geo and use something else

I'm so glad Brandon has left us for the time being. This would be another 20 page thread which got derailed after the 3rd post. HDCCTV has wayyyyyyyy too many bugs to be a viable solution for you right now.

They don't need to have much in the way of gauge to carry data and power. And if I were to crimp rj45's with me teeth, I'd hope to have teeth like Jaws from Bond (not the shark)

I use my teeth as bad as that is!

Are there any buildings or structures located between the central building and the cameras? I don't think fibre to each camera is a cost feasible solution here. MS Paint us the layout and that will give us a better idea of how to design this for you.

That only specifies private residences. That makes no mention of public places which is what your camera would be focused on. In fact, given that the section you quote explicitly makes no reference to surveillance of a public place means that other laws apply to your cameras (I think) I'm willing to bet that your cameras on the shopping centre and the park are in fact illegal. **EDIT** Talk to a civil liberties group or a lawyer, they know about these things more than anyone else.

IMPORTANT Before you embark on this endeavour, you appear to want to focus on quite a few areas outside your own home. Check that this is legal first with which ever country/state you live in. Using your camera to see the shopping centre 2 streets over is probably not legal given that you'd probably have views into neighbours yards. Otherwise you might end up forking out for some expensive paperweights! Other things to consider. Your FOV's on your camera are determined by the lens, not the camera. *** more to come ***